9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 617X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity period of the e-way bill, for cargo other than over dimensional cargo, would vary depending upon whether the distance traversed is upto 100 km or more. While one day validity is given for distance traversed upto 100 km, an additional day is granted for every 100 kms or part thereof traversed thereafter. Similarly, in the case of over dimensional cargo, one day validity is granted for up to 20 km traversed, and an additional day for every 20 km or part thereof traversed thereafter. The mere fact that the respondent had detained the goods did not, in any manner, prevent the petitioner from extending the validity period of the e-way bill, and producing a copy of the extended e-way bill before the authority for the purposes of seeking a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the instant case the petitioner had time till 8 am on 06.11.2020 for extending the validity of the e-way bill, whereas the detention was at 1.30 am on 06.11.2020. It is submitted, therefore, that there was no valid ground for detention of the goods and the goods ought to be released without further delay. 3. I have heard Sri.Harisankar V.Menon, the learned counsel for the petitioner and also Dr.Thushara James, the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 4. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar, I find it difficult to accept the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. In my view, the classification in the table under R.138(10) is essentially betw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontention that he did not extend the validity of the e-way bill because by that time the goods had already been detained by the respondent. The mere fact that the respondent had detained the goods did not, in any manner, prevent the petitioner from extending the validity period of the e-way bill, and producing a copy of the extended e-way bill before the authority for the purposes of seeking a clearance of the goods. 6. In the result, I find that the detention of the goods and the vehicle in the instant case cannot be said to be unjustified. Taking note of the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, I permit the petitioner to clear the goods and the vehicle on furnishing a bank guarantee for the amount demanded in the impug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
